Posts for 'Sports'

The Olympic Games continue to be a prime area of broadband video innovation. Following on the heels of the groundbreaking Broadband Olympics from Beijing last summer, yesterday brought news from Canada's Olympic Broadcast Media Consortium (which holds the Canadian rights to the 2010 Vancouver Games) of even more extensive broadband Olympic coverage at CTVOlympics.ca and RDSOlympiques.ca.

Alon Marcovici, the VP of Digital Media and Research for the consortium told me yesterday that the every single moment of Olympic competition will be streamed live, so that if you have a broadband connection, you won't miss a moment of the action. I had Alon on a panel I moderated last year at the NAB Show, and his description then of what's involved with this unprecedented coverage was pretty incredible to hear. Broadband has created a whole new workflow, often relying on newer technologies that have not been tested at this scale. It's a bit of a high-wire act, but when it all comes together the payoff for consumers is significant.

For the Vancouver games, the consortium will provide 2,400 hours of online coverage, including a quad-screen mosaic option that will allow the viewer to watch 4 live streams concurrently. Because of the cross-media ownership in Canada, there will be lots of integration with newspaper and radio coverage, as well as bi-lingual (English and French) streams. There's also going to be a real emphasis on user-generated content, such as "Call the Game," a contest where users can overlay their own audio on historic Olympic moments, with entries voted on by other users.

No doubt we'll be hearing more from NBC, which again holds the U.S. rights, about their extensive use of broadband again. Add it all up and the Vancouver Games promise to be another seminal moment in broadband's evolution.

What do you think? Post a comment now.

The Super Bowl ads are continuing to generate all kinds of buzz and continued chatter. In the spirit of "everything's been said, but not by everyone," here are a few additional broadband-related thoughts.

Doritos user-generated contest is a big winner - Doritos snagged 2 of the top 5 placements in the USA Today Ad Meter popularity rankings, displacing Anheuser-Busch for the first time. The fact that the Herbert brothers of Indiana could have created an ad more popular than all of those by the pros is impressive enough. More interesting though to me is Doritos is steadily morphing its brand into one which its customers control. This was the 3rd time Doritos handed over its Super Bowl advertising to fans to both submit ads and also vote on them. I've written about other brands' UGV contests, but Doritos is clearly the furthest along in embracing this concept. It's a great differentiator for the brand and will only build further momentum in the future.

The ad development process usually starts with identifying key brand attributes (e.g. "convenient," "affordable," "wide variety," "hip," etc.). Did the Hulu marketing team start with attributes like "deceitful" or "creepy" or "offbeat?" Seemingly so. Although the spot was fun, it didn't do anything to articulate Hulu's great value proposition. Further, is Hulu now going to pursue this creepy positioning further? If they do, does that make sense for the brand? But if they don't, wasn't the ad a waste of effort, with little continued momentum? I'm not an ad expert, but I'm not clear on what Hulu was trying to do here, other than get some great yucks.

How about some more "behind-the-scenes" and "making-of" video - Ad executives don't seem to understand what filmmakers discovered with DVDs years ago - that the backstory around the final cut is often even more interesting to fans. Since DVDs offer the capacity to provide director's notes, explanations of special effects, outtakes, actor interviews, etc they often do. This stuff is fascinating. Same with broadband; it offers brands the ability to provide a lot more video than just the ads themselves on their web sites, which some did indeed do.

But many others who could have done so, did not. Two that come right to mind: Coke, whose fascinating ad with insects stealing a sleeping man's bottle had some of the best special effects ever. How about some interviews with the computer animation team that did them? That would be fascinating. The other: E-Trade's talking babies. How'd they do that? Would love to know.

Should ads be rated or filtered? Ok, here's something controversial to think about - should Super Bowl ads be rated or filtered somehow? This is supposed to be family entertainment after all, isn't it? Does the woman getting stripped in the Doritos "Bus" ad or the suggestive GoDaddy girls belong in prime-time? I wonder. Or maybe the online galleries should rate the ads somehow? Maybe the racier ones deserve a parental warning? Just a thought.

Ok, that's it for the '09 Super Bowl, on to other topics...

What do you think? Post a comment now.

Once again it was an incredibly exciting Super Bowl. And once again, the ads were a broadband fumble. I've been saying for three years now that broadband has introduced a whole new opportunity for Super Bowl advertisers to derive more value and drive engagement, making the ridiculous $3 million per ad that they pay far more worthwhile. Regrettably, the brains behind most of the Super Bowl's ads seem hopelessly oblivious to this notion.

I've watched all 56 ads this morning to see which ones had a broadband or online component. Here's what I found:

• 37 of the ads (66%) were tagged with the advertiser's URL (though some of them went by so fast it would have been nearly impossible to remember or write them down). Akamai has reported traffic spikes for many of these sites. For the online sites like Priceline, Overstock, Monster and CareerBuilders, tagging works very well to reinforce the brand.
• 19 of the ads (34%) were not tagged with the advertiser's URL. Oddly, this includes all of the Budweiser ads. From the people that brought us Bud.tv one would think they'd have a little more appreciation for the role of the web.
• Of the 37 ads with a URL shown, only 6 contained an explicit call to action to visit the web site (GoDaddy "Continues at GoDaddy.com," Disney-Pixar "Up" movie, "To see a special first look go to Disney.com," Universal Heroes, "Visit site for a free 7 day ticket," Monster.com, "Never been a better time to go to Monster.com,", Frosted Flakes, "Help decide where at FrostedFlakes.com," and Vizio, "Visit us at Vizio.com to check out 55 inch million dollar event."). These show solid attempts at engaging the audience beyond the on-air ad itself.
• Upon visiting the web sites of the 37 advertisers who tagged their ads with their URLs, 29 of them contained some video. But of these only 13 offered some video beyond just a replay of the ad. That means that of the total 56 ads, just 23% leveraged broadband video in some meaningful way.

What are a few examples? GoDaddy was surely a hands-down video winner again, by urging viewers to visit their web site, presumably for even more titillating video of the GoDaddy girls and Danica Patrick. Bridgestone Tires offered behind the scenes of how their Potato Head ad was created. Three films, "Year One, " "Up" and "Monsters vs. Aliens" all provided some first look or behind the scenes video. Gatorade introduced the "MissionG" reality series that the brand is sponsoring. NFL.com which showed the winner of its "Super Ad Contest" (Usama Young) also has the full gallery of all the players' ads. In addition, Discovery told me that Toyota has a very cool "Making of" video for its Killer Heat ad for its Tundra playing on HowStuffWorks.com. Unfortunately, there was no promotion of it during the ad itself, or even on Toyota.com.

Three years ago I thought for sure this would happen, and as a result I was speculating that Super Bowl ads could eventually fetch $10 million. But with each passing year I'm getting a little more skeptical that big brand advertisers and their agencies actually understand what's happening with broadband video and how it opens up new horizons for them. Maybe 2010 will be different...

What do you think? Post a comment now.

I got a tip yesterday about "Game Rewind," a feature that NFL.com has apparently launched in the last week or so. For a mere $20/season, you can now watch full, commercial-free replays of all the season's games. The video is delivered in terrific quality by Move Networks, and as seen below, also offers a side window that shows a synopsis of the game's scoring. I'm not a huge football fan, but since I missed the exciting end of last week's Patriots-Seahawks game, I simply dragged to the fourth quarter and sat back and enjoyed (btw, how nice is it to watch commercial-free?!).

One suggestion for the NFL team: introduce EveryZing's MetaPlayer, Gotuit VideoMarkerPro or Digitalsmiths (or someone else's metadata-based search technology) so that fans can quickly retrieve only the highlights they care about (especially for the fantasy crowd). If I just want to see Matt Cassel's touchdown passes, it would sure be nice to enter that phrase and be shown those specific highlights only. Still, Game Rewind is a very cool new feature, of course only possible courtesy of broadband delivery.

What do you think? Post a comment now.

1. Advertising business model gains further momentum

I saw '08 as a year in which the broadband ad model continued growing in importance as the paid model remained in the back seat, at least for now. I think that's pretty much been borne out. We've seen countless new video-oriented sites launch in '08. To be sure many of them are now scrambling to stay afloat in the current ad-crunched environment, and there will no doubt be a shakeout among these sites in '09. However, the basic premise, that users mainly expect free video, and that this is the way to grow adoption, is mostly conventional wisdom now.

The exception on the paid front continues to be iTunes, which announced in October that it has sold 200 million TV episode downloads to date. At $1.99 apiece, that would imply iTunes TV program downloads exceed all ad-supported video sites to date. The problem of course is once you get past iTunes things fall off quickly. Other entrants like Xbox Live, Amazon and Netflix are all making progress with paid approaches, but still the market is held back by at least 3 challenges: lack of mass broadband-to-the-TV connectivity, a robust incumbent DVD model, and limited online delivery rights. That means advertising is likely to dominate again in '09.

2. Brand marketers jump on broadband bandwagon

I expected that '08 would see more brands pursue direct-to-consumer broadband-centric campaigns. Sure enough, the year brought a variety of initiatives from a diverse range of companies like Shell, Nike, Ritz-Carlton, Lifestyles Condoms, Hellman's and many others.

What I didn't foresee was the more important emphasis that many brands would place on user-generated video contests. In '08 there were such contests from Baby Ruth, Dove, McDonald's, Klondike and many others. Coming up in early '09 is Doritos' splashy $1 million UGV Super Bowl contest, certain to put even more emphasis on these contests. I see no letup in '09.

3. Beijing Summer Olympics are a broadband blowout

I was very bullish on the opportunity for the '08 Summer Games to redefine how broadband coverage can add value to live sporting events. Anyone who experienced any of the Olympics online can certainly attest to the convenience broadband enabled (especially given the huge time zone difference to the U.S.), but without sacrificing any video quality. The staggering numbers certainly attested to their popularity.

Still, some analysts were chagrined by how little revenue the Olympics likely brought in for NBC. While I'm always in favor of optimizing revenues, I tried to take the longer view as I wrote here and here. The Olympics were a breakthrough technical and operational accomplishment which exposed millions of users to broadband's benefits. For now, that's sufficient reward.

4. 2008 is the "Year of the broadband presidential election"

With the '08 election already in full swing last December (remember the heated primaries?), broadband was already making its presence known. It only continued as the year and the election drama wore on. As I recently summarized, broadband was felt in many ways in this election cycle. President-elect Obama seems committed to continuing broadband's role with his weekly YouTube updates and behind-the-scenes clips. Still, as important as video was in the election, more important was the Internet's social media capabilities being harnessed for organizing and fundraising. Obama has set a high bar for future candidates to meet.

5. WGA Strike fuels broadband video proliferation

Here's one I overstated. Last December, I thought the WGA strike would accelerate interest in broadband as an alternative to traditional outlets. While it's fair to include initiatives like Joss Wheedon's Dr. Horrible and Strike.TV as directly resulting from the strike, the reality is that I believe there was very little embrace of broadband that can be traced directly to the strike (if I'm missing something here, please correct me). To be sure, lots of talent is dipping its toes into the broadband waters, but I think that's more attributable to the larger climate of interest, not the WGA strike specifically.

6. Broadband consumption remains on computers, but HD delivery proliferates

I suggested that "99.9% of users who start the year watching broadband video on their computers will end the year no closer to watching broadband video on their TVs." My guess is that's turned out to be right. If you totaled up all the Rokus, AppleTVs, Vudus, Xbox's accessing video and other broadband-to-the-TV devices, that would equal less than .1% of the 147 million U.S. Internet users who comScore says watched video online in October.

However, there are some positive signs of progress for '09. I've been particularly bullish on Netflix's recent moves (particularly with Xbox) and expect some other good efforts coming as well. It's unlikely that '09 will end with even 5% of the addressable broadband universe watching on their TVs, but even that would be a good start.

OK, that's it for '08. On Monday the focus turns to what to expect in '09.

What do you think? Post a comment now.

EveryZing, a company I wrote about last February, is announcing the launch of its MetaPlayer today and that DallasCowboys.com is the first customer to implement it. My initial take is that MetaPlayer should have strong appeal in the market, and could well shake things up for other broadband technology companies and for content providers. Last week I spoke to EveryZing's CEO Tom Wilde to learn more about the product.

MetaPlayer is interesting for at least three reasons: (1) it drives EveryZing's video search and SEO capabilities inside the videos themselves, (2) it provides deeper engagement opportunities than typically found in other video player environments and (3) it enables content providers to dramatically expand their video catalogs, while maintaining branding and editorial integrity.

To date EveryZing's customers have used its speech-to-text engine to create metadata for their sites' videos, which are then grouped into SEO-friendly "topical pages" that users are directed to when entering terms into the sites' search box. Speech-to-text and other automated metadata generating techniques from companies like Digitalsmiths are becoming increasingly popular as content providers continue to recognize the value of robust metadata.

MetaPlayer takes metadata usage a step further by creating virtual clips based on specified terms, which are exposed to the user. A user's search produces an index of these virtual clips, which can be navigated through time-stamped cue points, transcript review, and thumbnail scenes (see below for example). The virtual clip approach is comparable in some ways to what Gotuit has been doing and is pretty powerful stuff, as it lets the user jump to desired points, thus avoiding wasted viewing time (e.g. just showing the moments when "Tony Romo" is spoken)

Next, MetaPlayer enables deeper engagement with available video. Yesterday, in "Broadband Video Needs to Become More Engaging," I talked about how the importance of engagement to both consumers and content providers. MetaPlayer is a move in this direction as it allows intuitive clipping, sharing and commenting of a specific video clip within MetaPlayer. Example: you can easily send friends just the clips of Romo's touchdown passes along with your comments on each.

Last, and possibly most interesting from a syndication perspective, MetaPlayer allows content providers to dramatically expand their video offerings through the use of what's known as "chromeless" video players. I was first introduced to the chromeless approach by Metacafe's Eyal Hertzog last summer. It basically allows the content provider to maintain elements of the underlying video player, such as its ability to enforce a video's business policies (ad tags, syndication rules, etc.), while allowing new features to be overlayed (customized look-and-feel, consistent player controls, etc.).

MetaPlayer takes advantage of chromeless APIs available now from companies like Brightcove, and also importantly YouTube. For example, the Cowboys could harvest select Cowboys-related YouTube videos and incorporate them into their site (this is similar to what Magnify.net also enables). With the chromeless approach, the Cowboys's user experience and their video player's branding is maintained while YouTube's rules, such as no pre-roll ads are also enforced.

To the extent that chromeless APIs become more widely available, it means that syndication can really flourish. The underlying content provider's model is protected while simultaneously enabling widespread distribution. All of this obviously leads to more monetization opportunities through highly targeted ads.

Bottom line: EveryZing's new MetaPlayer addresses at least three real hot buttons of the broadband video landscape: improved navigation, enhanced engagement and expanding content selection/monetization. All of this should give MetaPlayer strong appeal in the market.

What do you think? Post a comment now!

The frenzy around user-generated video ads hit a new peak yesterday as Frito-Lay announced it is offering a $1 million prize to an amateur who creates a Doritos ad that scores the highest rank in USA Today's Super Bowl Ad Meter.

I believe the new campaign, which comes on top of 2 previously successful Super Bowl user-generated video ("UGV") ad contests from Doritos, is a sure-fire winner for the brand. It reflects some very smart thinking by Doritos' executives and will further accelerate the very significant trend around brand-sponsored UGV contests (see chart below for examples of UGV contests that have run in the past year). I've been writing about the UGV ad craze for a while now on VideoNuze and I see it driving continued evolution in brand-agency relations.

The new Doritos UGV campaign works for a variety of reasons. First and foremost, the top prize, and the four finalist prizes of $25,000 and a trip to the Super Bowl, are all very enticing awards, certain to drive tons of submissions. Winning the top prize - which requires the #1 rank in the USA Today Ad Meter - is a big-time challenge, but it is seriously aided by all the pre-game publicity this contest will be receiving. Doritos is cleverly stoking things by positioning the ad as an opportunity to "take down the big guys" - an obvious reference to Anheuser-Busch which has won the #1 rank for the last 10 years. With "Yes We Can" and "Yes We Will" political slogans ascendant, "power to the people" pitches like the one Doritos is making have a nice tailwind on their side.

This pre-game buzz means Super Bowl viewers are specifically going to be on the lookout for the Doritos UGV ad, helping its rank. Of course if you're an advertiser, especially in this ad-skipping era, viewer anticipation for your ad is close to nirvana as it gets. It builds brand awareness, engagement and presumably sales...3 big wins when you're spending an estimated $3 million for a 30 second Super Bowl ad. And of course, just think about all the free market research Doritos is collecting along the way, as loyal buyers showcase their thoughts and feelings about the product and brand.

In fact, it's Doritos' decision to morph a conventional Super Bowl ad buy into a broadband-centric, user-oriented campaign that's truly noteworthy here. VideoNuze readers know that I've been ranting for 3 straight Super Bowls that broadband opens up all kinds of new creative avenues for brands to extract new value from their game-day spending and generate a far-better ROI on the insane prices they're required to pay for this once a year extravaganza.

I have been appalled at how few Super Bowl advertisers have actually seized their broadband opportunities (note having ads playing in post-game online galleries is nice, but nowhere near what broadband is capable of). All of this has caused me to wonder whether agencies, and brands, were hopelessly oblivious to broadband's emerging role.

Doritos clearly is not among those trapped in yesterday's advertising thinking. It seems to get what broadband can do for its brand and its Super Bowl ad strategy. With its new UGV campaign, the ROI that Doritos will get on its actual game-day spend will far surpass those of its competitors. With luck that should help spur others to focus more on broadband in their future Super Bowl ads.

What do you think? Post a comment!

Welcome to September. Before looking ahead, here's a quick recap of 3 key topics from August:

1. Advertising model remains in flux

Broadband video advertising was a key story line in August, as it seems to be every month. The industry is rightly focused on the ad model's continued evolution as more and more players in the value chain are increasingly dependent on it. This month, in "Pre-Roll Video Advertising Gets a Boost from 3 Research Studies," I noted how recent research is showing that user acceptance and engagement with the omnipresent pre-roll format is already high and is improving. However, as many readers correctly noted, research from industry participants must be discounted, and some of the metrics cited are not necessarily the best ones to use. I expect we'll see plenty more research - on both sides of pre-roll's efficacy - yet to come.

Meanwhile, comScore added to the confusion around the ad model by first highly ranking YuMe, a large ad network, very high in its reach statistics, only to then reverse itself by downgrading YuMe, before regrouping entirely by introducing a whole new metric for measuring reach. In this post, "comScore Gets Its Act Together on Ad Network Traffic Reporting," I tried to unravel some of this mini-saga. Needless to say, without trustworthy and universally accepted traffic reporting, broadband video is going to have a tough slog ahead.

2. Broadband Olympics are triumphant, but accomplishments are overshadowed

And speaking of a tough slog, the first "Broadband Olympics" were a huge triumph for both NBC and all of its technology partners, yet their accomplishments were overshadowed by a post-mortem revenue estimate by eMarketer suggesting NBC actually made very little money for its efforts. This appeared to knock broadband video advertising back on its heels, yet again, as outsiders pondered whether broadband is being overhyped.

The Olympics became a hobbyhorse of mine in the last 2 weeks as I tried to clarify things in 2 posts, "Why NBCOlympics.com's Video Ad Revenues Don't Matter" part 1 and part 2. These posts triggered a pretty interesting debate about whether technology/operational achievements are noteworthy, if substantial revenues are absent. My answer remains a resounding yes. But having exhausted all my arguments in these prior posts, I'll leave it to you to dig in there if you'd like to learn more about why I feel this way.

3. Broadband's impact is wide-ranging

VideoNuze readers know that another favorite topic of mine is how widespread broadband's impact is poised to become, and in fact already is. A number of August's posts illustrated how broadband's influence is already being felt across a diverse landscape.

Here's a brief sampling: "Vogue.TV's Model.Live: A Magazine Bets Big on Broadband" (magazines), "Tanglewood and BSO Pioneer Broadband Use for Arts/Cultural Organizations," (arts/culture), "American Political Conventions are Next Up to Get Broadband Video Treatment," (politics), "Citysearch Offering Local Merchants Video Enhancement," (local advertising) and "1Cast: A Legit Redlasso Has Tall Mountain to Climb" (local news).

I expect this trend will only accelerate, as more and more industries begin to recognize broadband video's potential benefits.

That's it for August and for the busy summer of '08. Lots more action to coming this fall!

Two days ago, I posted "Why NBCOlympics.com's Video Ad Revenues Don't Matter." I'll take the risk today of "beating a dead dog" by writing again about this same topic, for a couple of reasons.

First, there were some great comments on the site and I received many emails both supporting and challenging my arguments. (As a sidenote, I've discovered an interesting dynamic with VideoNuze - though I've repeatedly tried to encourage readers to post comments so all readers are able to see, folks seem more comfortable just emailing me directly for a one-on-one dialogue. I'm not going to resist human nature here, but again, I would love even more if you share your reactions by posting a comment so the whole community benefits!)

Second, the real trigger for writing a follow-up part 2 today is an incident I experienced yesterday. I gave a presentation about broadband video to a group of investors. These were mainly people who are familiar with broadband video, but not necessarily steeped in it. Upon finishing up and opening the Q&A, an early question/comment was, "Hey Will you lay out great points about broadband, yet I just read somewhere earlier this week that even NBC's Olympic video, which should have been a big revenue opportunity if ever there was one, generated little money for NBC and looks like it was a total failure for them. Given that, why should people bother investing in this medium? It doesn't seem promising."

Ugh. Ugh. Ugh. This is exactly the perception that I sensed would be created out of the blogosphere's and mainstream media's coverage of eMarketer's NBCOlympics.com revenue estimate. And why it is so vital that people interested in broadband video not get distracted by this single data point. Instead, maintaining perspective about where the industry stands and what needs to be done to grow should be the real focus.

I totally get the point made by people in their comments and emails that video providers must show they can make real money in the broadband medium. Ultimately, that's paramount. In particular it's key that broadband not get tagged as the "digital pennies" medium, in contrast to the traditional "analog dollars" model.

But I'll continue to insist that the path to industry revenues and profits begins by demonstrating the technical/operational viability of the broadband medium, massive user adoption of it and differentiated engagement with it. To be sure, progress is being made on all fronts. Still, there is still a long road ahead to drive significant shifts in advertiser spending to broadband. If you're a media buyer today, you're very intrigued by broadband and are likely experimenting with it.

But you're looking for more proof points before making bigger spending commitments. Can broadband's architecture scale to handle massive traffic loads, or are the Chicken Littles right that the Internet will crash under video's massive weight? Can broadband video's quality compare with TV, and HD in particular? Given the broadband choice, will users in fact shift their consumption patterns? And if they do, how different will their awareness and engagement with ads be? Importantly, when is broadband video actually going to be widely and easily available on TVs, not just computers?

These are but a few of the questions repeatedly being asked. And many of these are what NBCOlympics.com has helped to answer. NBC could have done lots of things to squeeze more money out of its Olympics video (though my guess is that no matter what revenue they generated cynics would have still said, "Is that all?"). Instead they focused on user value/experience and pushed the broadband envelope considerably. Others are doing the same. More needs to be done, and I believe it will.

As the saying goes, "Rome wasn't built in a day." So too with this exciting new medium. Revenues will not gush immediately. Staying focused on the core building blocks is the key. In short, I'm bullish long-term, but highly realistic short-term.

What do you think? Please post a comment! Or send me an email if you really prefer!

There was much reporting yesterday of eMarketer's estimate that NBC generated revenue of $5.75 million from its broadband Olympics video. The firm's press release dismissively called the sum "a passable performance." Others, from the blogosphere to mainstream media piled on, characterizing NBC's video revenues as underwhelming, using terms such as "pittance," "piddling," and "unimpressive."

Let's hold on a second here. At the risk of sounding like an irrepressible NBC supporter, I'd like to offer the alternative viewpoint: NBCOlympics.com's video ad revenues actually don't matter.

Don't get me wrong, when it comes to high-stakes Olympics broadcasting - and a sagging economy to boot - every dime counts. Rather, my point is that by focusing on the broadband ad number (which at virtually any level would have been a mere rounding error on NBC's $1 billion+ of overall Olympic ad revenues) we are getting distracted from NBC's real and very valuable broadband accomplishments.

Consider this: there were more on-demand and live sports choices for Olympics viewers than ever, NBC and its technology partners conquered herculean operational challenges without any major snafus and the foundation was laid for broadband to play an increasingly important and integral role in all future iconic programming events.

Focusing just on the operational achievements for a moment, a conversation I had yesterday with Brick Eksten, President of Digital Rapids, the company that provided all of the video encoding and streaming technology for NBC's live streaming events was a reminder of all the complexities NBC and its partners took on. There were up over 100 live simultaneous feeds that needed to be ingested, encoded in multiple bit-rates and delivered in real time across the globe to the right distribution points. All of this had never been done before.

Unlike domestic implementations or those focusing mainly on on-demand delivery, live broadband delivery from China meant spec'ing out all the delivery systems in advance and then shipping all of the gear well in advance of the event itself. There were many unknown variables, beginning with the vast potential range of concurrent users. So long hours were invested by partners modeling different scenarios to meet targeted delivery quality goals. Compounding matters, Brick explained that due to space, manpower and time limitations, Digital Rapids and others were challenged to push their systems to do things not previously done.

Meanwhile, NBC faced a pioneer's balancing act, simultaneously trying to preserve the value for its on-air broadcast rights/supporting advertisers, while meeting consumers' expectations for broadband on-demand access to everything. NBC could have chosen to charge for broadband access (as CBS originally did with March Madness, and as MLB continues to do) or provide only highlights clips or nothing via broadband at all. Instead, it offered up - at no charge - 2,200 hours of live streaming and 3,000 hours of on-demand.

Some fans on the sidelines have groused this wasn't enough. Now some analysts are saying that NBC could have generated more ad revenue if it had opened the broadband spigot further. These comments miss the bigger point: NBC moved the broadband market dramatically forward with its Olympics coverage. Focusing on what NBC proved with the first "Broadband Olympics," rather than what attributable revenue it generated, is what's most important for all of us to remember.

What do you think? Post a comment now.

Last Friday, in "Get Ready for the Broadband Olympics," I posited that the '08 Beijing Games would be looked back upon as the first "Broadband Olympics." NBC has made a massive investment in delivering the portions of the Games both live and on-demand via NBCOlympics.com and other outlets. A week into the Games, the broadband coverage and user experience is exceeding my and others' expectations.

First the numbers, which are staggering. NBC has been pumping out news releases on a daily basis touting their Total Audience Measurement Index or "TAMi" rating, broadcast audience records and online usage. Focusing just online, through yesterday NBCOlympics.com has attracted 25 million unique visitors, driving 456 million page views and 22 million video streams which total 3.5 million hours of video consumed. These figures easily outpace the '04 Athens Games.

A major drawing card in the '08 Games is of course Michael Phelps's drive for 8 golds. And so far the peak dramatic event in the Phelps narrative was the 4x100 freestyle relay in which teammate Jason Lezak swam the split of his life. That thrilling video alone has been viewed over 2 million times, providing a textbook example of how unique Olympic moments are tailor-made for broadband on-demand coverage. (Note, while not a big swimming fan myself, I have to admit I've watched the last leg of that race a half dozen times. If you haven't seen it, it's an absolute must)

Meanwhile, the live streaming has been a fun element of NBCOlympics.com. I've found myself periodically perusing the little red "LIVE" flags on NBC's home page and tuning in briefly to sample sports I have no affiliation to, but are neat to dip into briefly (e.g. women's badminton or table tennis).

Overall, the user experience is excellent. Beyond the well thought-out navigation, a key part of the experience owes to Microsoft Silverlight which enables totally new broadband video capabilities. Picture-in-picture, 4 live concurrent streams, zero-buffer rewinding, and of course glorious video quality (even in large-screen mode) are all breakthroughs. So far I haven't seen or heard about any delivery or viewing glitches.

Through NBC's massive investment in broadband coverage, consumers are going to enjoy a completely different Olympic experience, obsoleting many of our traditional responses around missing key Olympic moments: "I just couldn't stay up so late to see that one" or "Hopefully they'll replay that one, I'd really like to see it, or "My kids wanted to see that one but it was during school."

It's hard to imagine a sporting event, or any other event for that matter, better suited to broadband coverage. The two key challenges of Olympic broadcast coverage have always been the limited shelf space that just one broadcast channel provides (leading to coverage of only the most popular sports, and even then mainly the final rounds) and the time zone differences, which have created an awkward scheduling mix for U.S. prime-time.

NBC, which has been touting its broadband Olympics coverage for months, has addressed these by offering a package of 2,200 hours of live streaming and 3,000 hours of on-demand highlights. The scale of NBC's broadband undertaking is unprecedented, and will easily create a new case study for future broadband event producers.

To get a little glimpse of how just the on-demand portion of coverage will work, yesterday I spoke with Anystream's CEO Fred Singer and COO Bill Holding. Anystream is a key media production and publishing partner of NBC's, essentially handling all of the work flows for the 10,000 video assets that will be available on-demand.

Fred and Bill gave me a sense of the massive complexity involved in ingesting video from the other side of the planet, processing it in a fraction of the customary time allowed, and then distributing it within minutes - according to an elaborate set of rights and business rules - to 16 partners in multiple formats. Often I speak of the complexity involved in the Syndicated Video Economy; there is no better example than the distribution of Olympics' video.

Lastly of course, there are all of us consumers. While unprecedented coverage is available at NBCOlympics.com and elsewhere, to actually enjoy it entails getting down the learning curve of what, where, when and how individual sports will be offered. In short, massive choice requires consumer involvement. Nevertheless, I expect we'll be hearing about some very impressive broadband stats from NBC over the next two weeks and thereafter.

Let the Games begin!

Baby Ruth hit a home run at Tuesday night's All-Star Game with its "Take Me Out to the Ballgame" user generated video contest. The contest was heavily promoted during the All-Star Game and ran in association with Major League Baseball.

In case you missed it, the challenge was to creatively sing the classic ballpark tune in 2 minutes or less. The contest received dozens of submissions, which were then narrowed to a list of finalists, judged by a committee of three. The judging criteria was weighted heavily toward originality, but also included creative use and/or incorporation of the Baby Ruth brand, ensuring that the candy maker got strong visibility in the videos. The winner got to perform during the 7th inning of the game. (I didn't see this part of the game, so I don't know if it happened. Note a peeve is that MLB/Baby Ruth should be offering video of the winner singing at Yankee Stadium, which would be an instant classic, but doesn't seem to be.)

Still, I'm a big fan of UGV contests like this especially when the brand, contest and tie-in event all harmonize, as was the case with this Baby Ruth contest. Though these contests require significant upfront coordination, the payoff is that they are a unique branding opportunity that can inexpensively break through today's ad clutter. Not to mention these contests are a real crowd-pleaser, playing on the same voyeuristic viewer impulses that programs like American Idol have tapped into brilliantly.

I've said repeatedly that the abundant volume of UGV available at YouTube and elsewhere provides evidence that there's a ton of amateur talent out there. Brands and others that figure out how to leverage it can generate excitement and deepen customer engagement. In addition - and with a little luck - these videos can also turn into viral sensations, driving a near infinite ROI for the underlying brand.

Other recent examples that combine UGV with high profile events include Dove's "Supreme Cream Oil Body Wash Ad Contest" (in conjunction with the Academy Awards) and MySpace/NBC's "Decision '08 Convention Contest" (in conjunction with this summer's political conventions). I expect more to come. If you see examples, please let me know!

What do you think? Post a comment now!

The Wall Street Journal reported yesterday that NBC will announce next week that the starting price for a 30 second ad during the 2009 Super Bowl will cost $3 million, a 10% increase over 2008. For sure one thing this means to me: broadband video's role must grow in order to earn Super Bowl advertisers a return on these outsized rates.

As some of you know I've been writing about this topic for the last few years, even preceding the launch of VideoNuze. In Jan '06, in "The $10 Million Super Bowl Ad?" I argued that Super Bowl ad prices were heading nowhere but up given the historic opportunity to fuse the best of brand advertising with the best of online advertising.

I thought the linchpin would be brands recognizing that broadband video elements (e.g. larger campaign narratives, user contests, etc.) should precede and/or follow the game ad, creating a far larger engagement and ROI scenario. With more potential benefits, Super Bowl ad buying would be far less risky and therefore more advertisers would be compelled to buy, thus driving prices up.

While prices have risen, it's been more because audiences have continued fragmenting, making the Super Bowl truly a once-a-year advertising opportunity. NBC's willingness to raise prices by 10% over '08, in the face of a difficult U.S. economy is further testament to the big game's luster.

Back in '06 I forecasted that creative lightbulbs would be going off on Madison Avenue for how to capitalize on broadband's potential to add value. Sadly in the last 2 years this hasn't materialized. In Jan '08, in "My Rant About Super Bowl Ads" I lamented the fact that of the 52 game ads, only 5 (later revised to 6) ads had a broadband component. While the ads themselves were viewed for weeks after in online galleries, the stark reality was that tens of millions of dollars of client ad spending was being dramatically sub-optimized by not incorporating any broadband video elements.

It may be unfair of me to say, but I place the disproportionate share of the blame for this on the agencies behind the Super Bowl ads. They seem oblivious to how their clients' ad strategies must change to reflect broadband and online's importance.

So here's my message to brands considering a Super Bowl '09 ad buy: with 8 full months until game day, if your agency is not presenting you now with at least a half dozen compelling ideas for how to incorporate broadband elements into your Super Bowl ads, switch agencies now. I mean it. They are under-serving you. Find an agency that gets it, not one that is stuck in a time warp. The brands that will really score in the '09 game will have ads that reflect today's broadband realities.

A short piece in Brandweek caught my attention yesterday. It was about a new video entitled "The Sixty Million Dollar Man," produced by Phoenix Suns point guard Steve Nash to promote a Nike shoe that Nash has worn since February called the "Trash Talk." The shoe is environmentally-friendly as it is made out of leather scraps and waste. The release of the video coincided with Earth Day.

The video is well-worth checking out, not only because it is a very clever spoof of the original "Six Million Dollar Man" program from 30 years ago and has amazing special effects, but also because it demonstrates the continuing embrace of broadband by brand marketers. This is a trend that I've been covering for a while on VideoNuze (check out here and here for more).

Of course, Nike has long been one of the most innovative advertisers, mixing subtle brand promotion with compelling examples of athletic achievement. The new 90 second Nash spot, available on YouTube, follows Nash's first effort, entitled "Training Day," which itself now has about 300K views on YouTube are in keeping with these traditions. (Apparently Nash is an avid film-maker and also an environmentalist.) In both spots, the only Nike promotion is a swoosh in the closing frame. Both are great examples of sponsored, yet engaging entertainment that would be very expensive to execute on-air.

Broadband is opening all kinds of new doors for brand advertisers. Initiatives seem to fall into 2 buckets: original entertainment/informative videos like the Nash spots, and user-generated contests like the recent TideToGo and Heinz Top This efforts. I expect we'll see a lot more broadband experimentation from brands to come.

You'd have to have slept through yesterday to miss the big news that ESPN is now syndicating video clips from a cluster of its programs to AOL, its first-ever such deal. I interpret the deal as an extremely strong indicator that the "Syndicated Video Economy" (as I described this trend 3 weeks ago) is inexorable, even for the richest and most powerful video brands.

Closing out another busy week, here are 3 diverse broadband video snippets that hit my radar in the past few days:

1. YouTube Drives the Political Newscycle

Back in December, in 6 Predictions for 2008, I suggested that "2008 is the year of the broadband presidential election." This seems to become more evident with each passing week. I find that particularly when watching cable news, YouTube's influence just keeps on growing.

For example, I'm a fan of "AC360" on CNN, which I try to catch at 10pm each night. This week the show was constantly replaying the YouTube videos of Rev. Jeremiah Wright that have dogged the Obama campaign. Conversely, a few weeks ago, Obama got a great tailwind from the massive attention paid to the viral "Yes We Can" music video sensation by will.i.am. That of course was on top of the earlier "Obama Girl" phenomenon. Separately, the McCain campaign just yesterday fired a campaign worker for posting a controversial video on YouTube about Obama and race. This too was covered on AC360 last night. Then of course there were the YouTube co-sponsored debates, offering video-based questions that were constantly replayed afterward.

The point of all this is that broadband video has turned election coverage upside down, making it incredibly hard for candidates to control the political newscycle. The "democratizing" effect of YouTube means that on any given day, at any given moment, something may get posted which diverts the campaign's attention. And with major media outlets paying such close attention to YouTube, everything is immediately amplified. Not since the early 1960s when TV began influencing presidential politics have we seen a new medium have such a profound impact on an election. And we still have 8 months to go until November...who knows what's yet to come!

2. SI Vault is Addictive

On to something more fun, if you haven't yet checked out Sports Illustrated's new "SI Vault" site just launched this week, I suggest you do. It's a highly addictive trip down memory lane. SI has digitized all of its assets and also made available non-SI content, all in one easy-to-use location powered by Truveo. Focusing on video, I found Franco Harris's "Immaculate Reception" from the 1972 Steelers-Raiders playoff game and also Doug Flutie's famous "Hail Mary" pass to beat Miami in 1984. I could have spent hours at the site, although it's not perfect. I tried finding Tom Watson's 1982 U.S. Open chip-in at Pebble Beach to beat Jack Nicklaus, but alas no results were found. Obviously all this stuff is available elsewhere online, but SI Vault creates a great context for sports fans to enjoy themselves, wrapping SI and non-SI content together in one nice package.

 

3. Apple's Roadblocks are Baaaack

And for even more fun, I encourage you to check out WSJ.com and NYTimes.com today. Apple is "roadblocking" the home pages of both again with a new Mac vs. PC ad, as they did back on Jan. 17th. This means that Apple has bought out all the home page leaderboard inventory on these 2 sites, so every time a visitor comes today, they see the same Apple ad. With all the talk about broadband video advertising, pre-rolls, overlays, etc, Apple again shows with its roadblocks how a little bit of creativity with rich media ad units can go a really long way. The ads are a great mix of interruption and opt-in and are no doubt highly effective branding units for Apple. Have a look and enjoy.

I promise, this will be my last post on the Super Bowl ads. I suspect some of you are getting sick of hearing about them, but the reality is that there are some cool follow up tidbits emerging that I think many of you will be interested in.

First a clarification. I accidently omitted mentioning Audi as another Super Bowl advertiser that had a broadband component to their ad. Their mention of "TruthInEngineering" at the end of their spot was so quick that I didn't even notice it. That's a shame, because when you visit the mini-site there's a lot of great video, including one lasting 3 minutes all about the making of the ad.

Ken Liebeskind has a good interview with Paul Venables, who is the founder and co-creative director of the ad agency that created the spot and the videos at the mini-site. I really like how well developed the whole "Truth In" concept has been executed in the mini-site. My only gripe with the execution of the TV spot is that just flashing "Truthinengineering.com" at the end for a quick second is insufficient to really optimize traffic flow. Though Venables says traffic is way up since the game, I think it would be far higher had they focused on the URL longer.

Meanwhile, some interesting follow up stats that have bubbled up. comScore is reporting that 13% of Super Bowl viewers watched an ad online and that 13% visited an advertiser's web site. Of those who visited an advertiser's web site, 38% visited GoDaddy.com, 22% Coca-Cola and 21% Pepsi.

OK, today no rant, just one more little insight to offer from Super Bowl ads.

Yesterday I highlighted the 5 ads (out of the total 52) which had a broadband component. They were:

GoDaddy - promoting Danica Patrick's "Exposure" banned ad and other videos

TideToGo - promoting "MyTalkingStain.com" a fun microsite

SoBe LifeWater - promoting "Thrillicious.com" a microsite where 2 more spots with the dancing lizards can be seen

Sunsilk - promoting "LifeCantWait.com", a microsite with a UGC contest which is not yet active

Pepsi - promoting "PepsiStuff.com", where users can download videos and music

I'm able to track click-throughs to each link I share in these emails. I thought you might be interested to see a graph of these clicks from yesterday. Note they're shown as an index, not actual numbers, with a starting index value of 100 for Sunsilk.

As you can see, VideoNuze email recipients expressed a pretty strong interest in the GoDaddy.com Danica Patrick ad. I'm sure many of you are not surprised since it has a pretty overt potential payoff for visitors.

The point is this: I think SoBe LifeWater missed a huge opportunity to keep viewers engaged, which would have both improved the ROI on their Super Bowl ad spend, and also deepened viewers' engagement with the brand. While the Campbell spot was hugely entertaining, it did little to power ongoing engagement. Contrast this with GoDaddy, which no doubt had people pouring into its web site since the spot ran, with ongoing chatter and brand-building taking place.

I love the Super Bowl ads as much as anyone. I never stop being amazed by the creativity and humor on display during each year's big game. This year was no exception: screeching squirrels, a strutting heart, shrunken heads, talking babies, the list goes on. For what Super Bowls ads are and always have been, they're terrific. My problem is that I believe broadband video allows Super Bowl ads to be much more than what they are and always have been. But the agency world does not seem to be getting this message.

Two years ago I wrote "The Ten Million Dollar Super Bowl Ad?", where I outlined a scenario under which a 30 second spot could someday go for ten million bucks. How? By combining the best of brand advertising (the big emotional play) with the best of online advertising (the big measurable, performance-oriented play).

I wrote in that post: "What I envision is that the 30-second spot during the game will become the viewer's introduction or re-introduction to the brand or product. Numerous online, broadband-centric tactics will follow, with video being the center of the action. In football terms, the 30-second spot will morph from throwing a long pass (which is accompanied by high drama, but low probability of an actual score) to executing a more consistent ground game (accompanied by lower drama, but a much higher probability of an actual score). With this added measurability and a direct feedback loop, marketers will have much less anxiety about whether to ante up for the big game (and therefore the price will spiral upward).

I thought agencies and marketers would see this light and rush toward it. Boy was I over-optimistic. After watching all 52 Super Bowl ads this morning (thanks AOL), I am completely dismayed to report that, by my count, only 5 ads had any broadband video component:

GoDaddy - promoting Danica Patrick's "Exposure" banned ad and other videos

TideToGo - promoting "MyTalkingStain.com" a fun microsite

Life Water - promoting "Thrillicious.com" a microsite with a 2nd spot with the dancing iguanas 

Sunsilk - promoting "LifeCantWait.com", a microsite with a UGC contest which is not yet active

Pepsi - promoting "PepsiStuff.com", with Amazon (ok, more focused on music than video)

All of the other 47 ads, representing tens of millions of dollars of clients' money, followed the same game plan from Super Bowls' past: go for either the clever, the funny or the gross, in an attempt to create buzz and fond memories for fans.

For me, this hidebound behavior showcases agencies at their most disappointing: unable to break out of the box, recognize new consumer engagement opportunities for their clients or embrace new technologies. Their inability or unwillingness to be more progressive is at the heart of why the whole advertising industry is in such chaos, with an increasing share of total spending shifting to online each year.